Submit your Article

India and Nepal share a long and open border stretched across five Indian states of Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal and Sikkim. On Nepal’s side, Madhesh, Koshi, Bagmati, Lumbini and Sudurpaschim touch India’s border. A mix of Himalayan hills and Tarai marks up the geography of its open borders, effective since 1950. Indian paramilitary force Shashatra Seema Bal (SSB) guards these borders from the Indian side while the Armed Police Force (APF) of Nepal guards Nepal’s side. Barring some contention, the India-Nepal open border has served its purpose effectively, whether it is keeping the tradition of Roti-Beti alive or contributing to the economies of both countries. Open borders also kept the bioregion of the Himalayas intact, whose impact is visible on the flora and fauna between the borders. 

Nevertheless, for states, security is a non-negotiable, as is the question of the security of open and porous borders and people living around and beyond them. India has been a victim of terrorism for a very long time, and Nepal also has been a victim of organized violence for decades. In 2020, during diplomatic tensions, Prime Minister K P Sharma Oli backed India’s call for a standard definition of terrorism during the UNGA. Five years down the line, we do not have a standard comprehensive convention against international terrorism, which rocked South Asia two months back in Pahalgam. India and Nepal have an extradition treaty, and the political elites and intellectuals see the border security with grave concern. 

However, there are growing anxieties from both sides about illegal migration. Elites in Kathmandu point out the illegal migration coming from India, while India also occasionally finds people from Myanmar and Bangladesh on the border regions with Nepal. There has also been a growing movement of countries from the Gulf and Turkey promoting their specific ways of Islam through many organizations in the Tarai region of Nepal, which is home to the majority of the Muslim population of the country. The mushrooming of many infrastructure projects backed by Turkey near the border areas needs closer scrutiny. The Turkish NGO Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief (IHH) has been flagged by Indian agencies as an entity of concern. Many reports in Indian as well as Nepali media from time to time report the activities of this organisation working with the Islamic Sangh Nepal as a security threat to both nations. A recently-released report has flagged specific concerns in India. 

After Operation Sindoor and Turkey’s open support to Pakistan in the same, Turkey and Pakistan are being viewed by India as security threats. This is why these new developments in the border regions of both countries are being viewed cautiously. It is also worth noting here that Indian anxieties over these developments are not only part of rhetoric, but India has faced multiple security risks, most notably the IC-814 hijacking and the fake Indian currencies printed with the help of Pakistan’s ISI. They have also used the traditional criminal networks between India and Nepal to further their means. Well-documented sources suggest that ISI has used Nepali soil to harm India since the 1980s. It has also harmed Nepal, as the country is currently on the FATF’s grey list due to ‘deficiencies in anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorist financing (CFT) regimes.’ Terrorists and financiers use any loopholes in any country to achieve their end results. The Nepal government, however, has taken the list very seriously, and the officials are working to remove the country from the list. 

If we look at the Turkish involvement in this already complex scenario, which is constantly working in tandem with Pakistan, it fuels more of India’s anxieties. There are multiple infrastructure projects IHH is taking with other organizations in the Tarai region, making up a thorny issue for Indian agencies. IHH’s record also backs these issues, as the organization has been accused of planning a bombing in Los Angeles in 1999 and is said to have ties with Al Qaeda. Many international agencies also flagged their concern about IHH, which is also known to support Erdogan and is said to have close relations with the Turkish government. 

In this context, the broader border security arrangements between India and Nepal need to be examined. The India-Nepal open border stands today at the intersection of tradition and shifting geopolitics. As external actors with divergent strategic ambitions insert themselves into the region, the onus is on India and Nepal to jointly future-proof the border against vulnerabilities that neither side can tackle alone. The task is straightforward: border management must evolve from merely guarding physical space to understanding and disrupting transnational networks that exploit social, religious and financial channels.

This calls for institutionalised cooperation, not just between security agencies, but also through shared platforms for intelligence, financial scrutiny and civic engagement along the border regions. A proactive approach would also mean enhancing community resilience in the Tarai and adjoining areas, ensuring that developmental gaps are not filled by opaque foreign entities with unclear agendas. Both governments can explore structured dialogues at the level of home ministries and central banks to counter emerging threats like terror financing and ideological radicalisation. At stake is not just bilateral security, but the health of the broader Himalayan bioregion, where open borders have historically sustained both people-to-people ties and ecological continuity. Preserving this openness while safeguarding sovereignty will require vigilance, trust-building and a strategic alignment that reflects the realities of an interconnected and contested neighborhood. India and Nepal have the history, goodwill and institutional frameworks to achieve this; what is needed now is the political will to update and act on them with clarity and foresight.

The author is a PhD Candidate at the School of International Studies, JNU, New Delhi

The private sector accounts for more than 80 percent of the national economy, according to the Federation of Nepalese Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FNCCI).  According to the apex body of the Nepali private sector, the number of private sector establishments surged from 28,600 in 1983 to 923,356 in 2018.

This growth accelerated after Nepal adopted liberal economic policies and embraced privatization in the early 1990s. The 1990 constitution, one of South Asia’s most progressive charters at that time, created an enabling environment for private sector investment, including in the media industry. In the years that followed, the private sector boomed which strengthened the economic health of private media houses. From the late 1990s through 2015, many media houses thrived financially, fueled largely by advertising from both the private sector and government. However, some also collapsed due to economic instability.

During the Maoist insurgency and the transition to the 2015 constitution, donor funding became another key source of income for Nepali media. Many outlets received substantial support to produce content aligned with the interests and agendas of international donors. In recent years, however, such funding has come under criticism, with concerns that it influenced politics and public policy in problematic ways. These funds are now in decline, leading to the shutdown of many legacy media outlets, particularly private and community radio stations that had played a critical role in informing and empowering rural communities. 

Following the promulgation of the new Constitution in 2015, and even before that, many donor organizations began shifting their focus to other regions, particularly in Africa and other conflicted-hit areas. In response, the Biden administration allocated support for independent media, including Nepal. But with the return of Donald Trump to the US presidency and the subsequent dismantling of USAID programs, media outlets that depended on American funding are now facing a deepening crisis. Across Asia and Africa, dozens of USAID-funded media organizations are on the brink of collapse. In Nepal too, media revenues from advertising are falling and international support is drying up.

Given this context, the time has come for Nepal’s private sector to step in, not as an act of charity, but as a commitment to safeguarding democracy. The private sector bears a huge responsibility that goes beyond profit-making. While some business houses with political connections may continue to benefit in the short term, a truly strong and sustainable private sector can only flourish in a democratic environment.

Around the world, there are examples of the private sector and middle class investing in the independent media to counter partisan journalism and to support civil society movements.

In their recent opinion piece, prominent scholars Semuhi Sinanoglu, Lucan Way and Steven Levitsky argue that a healthy private sector and a strong middle class form the backbone of a robust independent media. They have cited the example of Malaysia’s popular newspaper Malaysiakini, which, supported by the private sector and a growing urban middle class, broke the political monopoly over the media landscape.  They also highlighted several other cases where the private sector has stepped in to support independent journalism, ultimately contributing to the strengthening of democracy.

According to a 2023 study by Center for International Media Assistance, case studies in Czechia, Romania and Serbia show that the private sector can and does play a meaningful role in protecting information integrity.  While most of these efforts are modest in scale, they demonstrate the potential for private sector engagement in addressing information disorder and the wider challenges facing independent media in the region, the study states.  

In India, too, the private sector has backed some independent media platforms practicing free and fair journalism. For instance, individual investors have supported ‘The Print’, an online portal led by veteran journalist Shekhar Gupta. The portal has publicly disclosed the names of its backers.

In Nepal, however, beyond advertisement, there have been few initiatives where the private sector has provided direct funding to independent media houses, enabling them to report without business or political interference. One exception, though still debated, is Ukaalo.Com, which focuses on investigative reporting. Since its launch, questions have been raised about its funding model and sources. While the outlet positions itself as a not-for-profit entity and maintains no affiliation with political or corporate groups, there is speculation that Buddha Air provided seed funding, along with other private sector individuals. However, the media house has not made its funding details public, limiting open discussion on the issue. 

There are no major initiatives in Nepal where the private sector is supporting independent journalism for the sake of strengthening democratic discourse. The issue is not about private media houses funding outlets to serve their own business interests. Rather, it is about the private sector contributing to media that can produce genuinely independent content, countering politically and commercially influenced narratives, and tackling misinformation and disinformation.

This is undoubtedly a difficult period for Nepal’s private sector. But some business houses have seen remarkable growth and are in a position to provide seed funding for new independent media ventures. The middle-class could also step in to support such initiatives.

Now, more than ever, the private sector is becoming the victims of misinformation and disinformation. In private conversations, top business leaders have expressed concern that they are being targeted by false or misleading narratives, often amplified by certain media outlets. The most effective way to counter this is through investment in independent media for fact-checking initiatives. 

Major media organizations throughout the world have begun creating dedicated departments to counter misinformation and disinformation. In Nepal, however, effective efforts on this front are lacking. The private sector should consider investing in this area, as information integrity is vital for the business to grow.

However, the private sector is hesitant to openly support independent journalism. Many fear backlash from political parties or the government. Even those few business leaders, who have recognized the importance of independent media, choose to remain silent out of fear that any critical reporting on those in power could result in retaliation under various pretexts.

Compounding the issue is the lack of trust and communication between independent media outlets and business houses. Many business leaders feel that their issues are not adequately represented in the mainstream media. One top businessman recently told me that the media only reached out for collaboration after a crisis had already hit. This means, there is a clear need for more dialogue and consultations between independent media houses and the private sector. 

At the same time, it is important to acknowledge that the private sector has not turned its back on independent media entirely. Despite the challenges, some businesses are still providing financial support. They deserve credit for recognizing the role of independent journalism in upholding democracy.

The private sector must fully understand why independent media is essential to democratic governance and why a healthy democracy is, in turn, necessary for sustainable private sector growth. There has been little public discussion about the private sector’s role in strengthening civil society and supporting free and fair journalism. If the private sector wants unbiased, balanced and trustworthy information in the public domain, now is the time to invest in independent media that can operate freely and fearlessly without political or corporate interference.

The year 2025 has been a roller coaster ride for the development sector. Some development partners have discontinued; others have downsized and focused on certain geographies/sectors and others still have changed course completely. What is clear is aid is not what it used to be, the pot is shrinking and shrinking fast. Developing countries must find alternative sources of finance to fund development outcomes—and strategically leverage grants and concessional capital to maximise financing of development needs. The British Embassy Kathmandu has been designing and implementing financial instruments that unlock and mobilise public and private sector finance to support economic growth, private sector development and climate change mitigation.

Nepal is a unique country and has been on a unique development trajectory. Nepal received more than $10bn in remittance in the last fiscal year supporting a positive macro-economic outlook. Still, challenges and vulnerability remain. Dependence on remittance has, sometimes, taken attention away from private sector development and local job creation. Nepali businesses are not adequately integrated with global value chains and attract the lowest levels of foreign investment in South Asia. This limits access to foreign partnerships, technology and know-how. Nepal’s tourism sector, for example, remains stagnant, largely due to a lack of innovation and market access. Despite this and other obvious challenges in the Nepali economy, there are attractive business and investment opportunities across several sectors which remain untapped.

Access to finance is critical to ensuring inclusive growth in Nepal. A study conducted by the British Embassy calculated the funding gap from formal financial channels to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) at over $950m. More than 80 percent of the SMEs rely on informal financing sources and almost 60 percent rely on family and personal savings to fund their financing needs. Even on the formal financing side, SMEs in Nepal have very limited options for raising capital outside of collateralised bank loans. This puts many women, for example, at a disadvantage when so few of them own property or have access to savings. Limited access to finance also stifles growth, innovation and job creation. While the recent fiscal and monetary policies are more supportive of the private sector and SMEs in Nepal, SME development requires strong collaboration between all stakeholders—the government, development partners and the private sector.

Many developing economies like Nepal struggle to attract foreign investments or local capital into high risk/high rewards investment opportunities. Bilateral and multilateral development finance institutions (DFIs) are keen to invest in Nepal as is shown by the number of DFIs active in the country and those that are keeping a close watch for the right investment opportunities. Bridging the gap between interest and investment requires all stakeholders to join forces to mitigate challenges and find and develop opportunities. Designing innovative financial structures will be key in terms of crowding in large amounts of private sector capital.

Blended finance platforms invite the government, development partners, and development finance institutions (DFIs) to collaborate and unlock access to finance. Blended finance strategically uses development finance (grants) to mobilise local and international private capital (commercial capital) into strategic sectors. Further, a reform-oriented public sector that builds a supportive business environment through policy stability and effective partnerships is essential to achieving sustainable development outcomes. 

The British Embassy Kathmandu has been using a blended finance approach to support access to finance in Nepal. Funds such as Business Oxygen and Dolma Impact Fund achieved the dual goal of supporting development outcomes and enhancing returns to investors. International Finance Corporation (IFC), the investment arm of the World Bank Group, has used UK official development assistance (ODA) to de-risk investments and mobilise finance for SMEs in Nepal. The right financial structuring can help further reduce the gap between demand for capital and supply of capital in the growing SME ecosystem.

Building on previous experience, the British Embassy is establishing Nepal in Business—Catalytic Finance to unlock new sources of capital for SMEs, from the Private Equity and Venture Capital (PEVC) space and financial institutions. This financing facility will be managed by the Dutch Entrepreneurial Development Bank- FMO. Demonstration effects from blended finance facilities—investment leveraged, strengthened capacity of the financial sector, and shifting understanding of risks—can be catalytic in this ecosystem. The facility is also expected to create well above 10,000 new jobs.

The author is the Development Director at the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) in Nepal

Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) plays a vital role in supporting economic growth for developing countries. For Nepal, which faces challenges such as limited domestic capital, infrastructure deficits and a narrow industrial base, FDI is particularly important. This essay outlines the significance of FDI in Nepal’s economic landscape, discusses the major obstacles Nepal faces in attracting foreign investment, presents relevant data trends and explores future opportunities along with policy suggestions to enhance Nepal’s economic progress through FDI.

Importance of FDI

Nepal’s economy is largely dependent on agriculture, which employs a majority of the population but contributes a smaller share to the GDP. The manufacturing and service sectors are still emerging, and domestic investment is insufficient to meet the country’s development needs. Consequently, foreign investment becomes a key source of capital infusion. FDI not only provides financial resources but also introduces modern technologies, expertise and access to international markets.

Through foreign investment, Nepal can improve productivity, diversify its economy and create jobs. Moreover, FDI helps alleviate foreign currency shortages by increasing exports and generating revenues, which are critical for sustaining economic growth. Hydropower, tourism, telecommunications, manufacturing and financial services are among the sectors receiving the most attention from foreign investors.

FDI trends: An overview 

FDI inflows into Nepal have remained relatively modest but stable in recent years. According to official data from Nepal Rastra Bank, FDI inflows hovered around $170m in 2018-19 and increased slightly to $182m in 2019-20. The pandemic caused a drop in 2020-21, with inflows declining to about $145m. Recovery signs appeared in 2021-22, with $160m, and early estimates for 2022-23 indicate a further rise to nearly $175m.

Cumulatively, the stock of foreign direct investment in Nepal is estimated between $1.2bn and $1.5bn. When compared to regional neighbors like India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, Nepal’s ratio of FDI to GDP is relatively low at around 0.44 percent, highlighting ample scope for improvement.

Hydropower projects dominate FDI inflows, making up approximately 40-45 percent due to Nepal’s large but underutilized potential in electricity generation. Telecommunications is the next largest sector, accounting for about 20 percent of FDI. Other sectors like manufacturing, tourism and banking attract smaller but significant shares, contributing to gradual economic diversification.

Challenges hindering FDI growth

Nepal faces several structural and institutional challenges that restrict its ability to attract and effectively utilize FDI:

• Political uncertainty: Frequent changes in government and inconsistent policies discourage long-term investments. Investors generally prefer stable environments where regulations are predictable and enforced.
• Inadequate infra: Poor road conditions, unreliable electricity supply and inadequate logistics infrastructure increase the operational costs for investors, reducing Nepal’s competitiveness compared to neighboring countries.
• Complex bureaucracy and regulatory barriers: Lengthy approval processes, lack of transparency and corruption add to the cost and time needed to establish and operate foreign businesses.
• Land acquisition and social resistance: Unclear land titles and local opposition often lead to project delays or cancellations, increasing uncertainty and risks for investors.
• Small domestic market: Nepal’s limited population size and low purchasing power restrict the market for products and services, compelling foreign firms to focus on exports, which face their own logistical hurdles.
• External shocks: Global events like the Covid-19 pandemic have disrupted global supply chains and dampened investor confidence, impacting FDI inflows.

Opportunities for boosting FDI

Despite the difficulties, Nepal has unique advantages and opportunities that can help attract more foreign investment:

• Hydropower development: Hydropower offers one of the most promising sectors for long-term foreign investment, both to meet domestic needs and to export electricity regionally.
• Tourism sector: Nepal’s diverse landscapes, cultural heritage and adventure tourism attract visitors worldwide. Investment in tourism infrastructure can stimulate FDI and create employment opportunities.
• Strategic location: Nepal’s position between India and China presents a potential hub for regional trade and manufacturing, especially if transport and border infrastructure are improved.
• Government reforms: Legislative measures like the Foreign Investment and Technology Transfer Act and the establishment of Special Economic Zones (SEZs) offer tax incentives and easier investment procedures.
• Public-private partnerships: PPP arrangements can mobilize foreign capital and expertise for infrastructure and social sector projects, sharing risks and benefits.

Maximizing benefits

To harness the full potential of FDI, Nepal should prioritize the following policy actions:

• Political and economic stability: Establishing a stable, transparent policy framework supported by all political parties is essential to build investor confidence.
• Investment in infra: Upgrading transport, power, digital connectivity and logistics infrastructure will reduce costs and improve Nepal’s attractiveness.
• Regulatory simplification: Streamlining administrative procedures through digital platforms, one-stop service centers and anti-corruption measures will ease the investment process.
• Land acquisition and community engagement: Developing clear and fair land policies and actively involving local communities will reduce conflicts and delays.
• Human capital development: Enhancing vocational education and training to match investor needs will improve labor productivity and attract higher-value investments.
• Sustainable investment practices: Aligning FDI with environmental protection and social inclusion will ensure long-term development benefits and community support.

In summary, FDI represents a vital source of capital, technology and innovation for Nepal’s economic development. While political instability, infrastructure gaps, regulatory hurdles and social challenges have limited Nepal’s ability to attract and fully utilize FDI, the country’s abundant natural resources and strategic location offer significant opportunities. By adopting consistent policies, investing in infrastructure, simplifying regulations and addressing social concerns, Nepal can create a conducive environment that encourages foreign investment. Such efforts will be critical to leveraging FDI as a driver of sustainable and inclusive growth, improving livelihoods and transforming Nepal’s economy over the coming decades.